Concerns about various starbase things.

[Stanky]

So lately there's been quite a few threads going around arguing about various things. This ranges from warp gates to logging out away from a station. But all these topics fall under the category of exploration. To put it simply, the community doesn't want to be stuck at the safezones.

So we want to expand outward. How do we do this? We have to fly out there, but what will we do once we are "out there." We can mine of course, and we can do some shipbuilding. But quite frankly we can't do long term expeditions out there without stations. Unless it has changed, stations are not going to be able to be built by players at EA release. Some ideas to circumvent this were massive long range ships, but having these ships is difficult because organizing the large crew necessary is difficult. As well as logging-out discussions, these concerns of mine make me think that we will be somewhat limited to fairly close to the safezone.

Oh yeah warp gates, they can wait. I'm more concerned about stations.

 

[Croomar]

From what I understand, you're asking what the purpose of exploration is supposed to be. I agree with you, as long as there's neither moons / planets nor any sort of space-landmarks nor the possibility for players to build bases, there is essentially none. None other than the sole purpose of exploring for fun and the experience of it.

I'd argue the majority of players interested in exploration would certainly appreciate a purpose, having a sense in exploring. But I'd also argue that those who are interested in exploration don't need a specific purpose. For many players, it's already fun enough to tackle the challenge of building an awesome long-range ship, to try and get that crew together, to spend the time on that ship, just see what happens, what you do discover in the end and seeing how far you get. I think exploration is plenty fun as activity alone, whether there is a deeper sense or incentive in it or not.

But the discussions you are refering to are discussions about problems on more basic levels, specifically problems that make the sole act of exploration alone either unreasonably difficult or downright impossible. In that regard, I have to agree with the common opinion shown there. Solving these problems by introducing certain features should take priority so exploration becomes a viable gameplay option at all. An incentive for it can be added later. After all, it would make less sense the other way around, wouldn't it?

 

[Stanky]

From what I understand, you're asking what the purpose of exploration is supposed to be. I agree with you, as long as there's neither moons / planets nor any sort of space-landmarks nor the possibility for players to build bases, there is essentially none. None other than the sole purpose of exploring for fun and the experience of it.

I'd argue the majority of players interested in exploration would certainly appreciate a purpose, having a sense in exploring. But I'd also argue that those who are interested in exploration don't need a specific purpose. For many players, it's already fun enough to tackle the challenge of building an awesome long-range ship, to try and get that crew together, to spend the time on that ship, just see what happens, what you do discover in the end and seeing how far you get. I think exploration is plenty fun as activity alone, whether there is a deeper sense or incentive in it or not.

But the discussions you are refering to are discussions about problems on more basic levels, specifically problems that make the sole act of exploration alone either unreasonably difficult or downright impossible. In that regard, I have to agree with the common opinion shown there. Solving these problems by introducing certain features should take priority so exploration becomes a viable gameplay option at all. An incentive for it can be added later. After all, it would make less sense the other way around, wouldn't it?

I agree fully. Though I'm less concerned with actual exploration. I just want to get away from the safezone long term. If we're all stuck near the safezone, the player factions cannot truly build themselves up. So I think limiting undeveloped features like this are going to prevent what Starbase was truly meant to be, and what it is capable of.

 

[Verbatos]

I think they are planning to allow us to build stations for ourselves at some point, and since 10 different factions can't safely set up at the same spot, they will slowly move deeper and deeper into space to protect their stuff, encouraging pirates and other factions to explore deep space to find and eliminate these stations, causing the stations to be rebuilt even further out, ad infinitum.

 

[damoran]

Everything seems to revolve around a heavy PVP dynamic. PVP usually works best when players are in close proximity. You've got two warring factions, all players will work towards gaining favor with one or the other so essentially there are only two teams until they add player factions much later. Any "exploration" that will be done, I would assume, is to complete a quest or gather resources for a faction which is an excuse to push you out of the safe zone and promote conflict.

 

[dusty]

.. so essentially there are only two teams until they add player factions much later.

Just to clarify: I'm pretty sure factions are a launch feature, since they're so important. It's player stations that (among other things) aren't planned til later.

 

[damoran]

The way I read it was, two factions at launch that are already determined Empire and Kingdom. You have to work missions for a faction and raise your standing even before you get access to join one of these existing factions. All players can form smaller companies that I"m assuming must decide to join with one of the two existing factions and if a company grows large enough they could eventually form their own faction (1:56 in video link below). It does not specify if being a faction is a prerequisite to building stand alone stations.

But whatever it is at launch, my point was, I think it would make sense that they want to keep us all close to the starter stations at first in order to stress test the servers and fine tune game mechanics.

 

[Stanky]

The way I read it was, two factions at launch that are already determined Empire and Kingdom. You have to work missions for a faction and raise your standing even before you get access to join one of these existing factions. All players can form smaller companies that I"m assuming must decide to join with one of the two existing factions and if a company grows large enough they could eventually form their own faction (1:56 in video link below). It does not specify if being a faction is a prerequisite to building stand alone stations.

But whatever it is at launch, my point was, I think it would make sense that they want to keep us all close to the starter stations at first in order to stress test the servers and fine tune game mechanics.

Honestly, Company and Faction mean the same thing. They didn't specify any advantages of being a faction over a company. So we can just assume it is a title. So I do see the point of keeping us close together in the beginning, but I don't want to stay close.

 

[damoran]

Honestly, Company and Faction mean the same thing. They didn't specify any advantages of being a faction over a company. So we can just assume it is a title. So I do see the point of keeping us close together in the beginning, but I don't want to stay close.

I don't think they are completely the same thing though. It sounds like factions are huge organizations such as the Alliance or the Horde in WoW. A Company would be a guild within the Horde.